# Splitting the Fangaming section up?



## Crazy Weavile (Jun 26, 2008)

There's a section for fangames, which is all well and good. But why not split it up to allow people to better use it for their purposes? Resources, games (NOT just fangames; original material too), discussion... All should be separate. This would allow better organization and thus make this a better place for developers. Opinions?


----------



## Zhorken (Jun 26, 2008)

No, we don't need more cluttery subforums.


----------



## ultraviolet (Jun 26, 2008)

It's not a fan-games forum. I don't think there needs to be that much focus around it.


----------



## Music Dragon (Jun 26, 2008)

Unnecessary. Nobody even uses that forum.


----------



## Butterfree (Jun 26, 2008)

You have to realize that if it were split into multiple forums, there would be two or three threads in each at the absolute most. How many threads will there ever be in that forum? How hard will it ever get to skim over all their titles to find what you're looking for? It makes no sense to split up the fan games forum. If we had a good few dozen game creators, sure, but the fact is that we have one or two.


----------



## Furretsu (Jun 26, 2008)

We need more game makers. ;)


----------



## Music Dragon (Jun 26, 2008)

RM2K/3 don't seem to work so well on Vista, I've noticed. Maybe it's just my comp.


----------



## Faltzer (Jun 27, 2008)

Gah. You know, RPG Maker isn't the only program for Game Making out there.. all I have been seeing now a days in the PKMN Community about Fangames is only Pokemon fangames. Maybe with more variety of games it would be much better.

Anyways, for those interested, Game Maker 7 works on XP/Vista and they are planning a Mac port and possibly Linux.


EDIT:



> We need more game makers. ;)


Well, if anybody cares I'm a GM user, though I'm too shy to post my creations.


----------



## The Quicker Picker-Upper (Jun 27, 2008)

AuroraKing said:


> We need more game makers. ;)


Ditto.

I've made games before, but only for myself, and I never really finished one due to laziness/irreversable script screw-ups due to me sucking at scripts... >_>
Eh, maybe I'll start on one, if I get support/time/inspiration. Maybe.

EDIT: Am I the only one who thinks it's oddly placed? It took me a while to find it the first time...


----------



## Furretsu (Jun 27, 2008)

Music Dragon said:


> RM2K/3 don't seem to work so well on Vista, I've noticed. Maybe it's just my comp.


So get XP or, even better, VX. ;)


----------



## Faltzer (Jun 28, 2008)

AuroraKing said:


> So get XP or, even better, VX. ;)


http://yoyogames.com/make/

:/


----------



## Furretsu (Jun 28, 2008)

Thanks, but I'm already aware of Game Maker's existence and have been for years.


----------



## Zhorken (Jun 28, 2008)

or even better stop being a butt and learn to code instead


----------



## Music Dragon (Jun 28, 2008)

Zhorken the Ocelot said:


> or even better stop being a butt and learn to code instead


I can't be bothered, dear. RM is good enough for me.


----------



## H-land (Jun 28, 2008)

It does NOT need split. I'd have to agree with those others who are saying that it's too rarely used for any purpose at all to justify subdividing it.


----------



## Faltzer (Jun 28, 2008)

Music Dragon said:


> I can't be bothered, dear. RM is good enough for me.


Why is this?


----------



## Music Dragon (Jun 28, 2008)

Faltzer said:


> Why is this?


Because it's fun, and all I'm after is fun, not hard work and complexity.


----------



## The Quicker Picker-Upper (Jun 28, 2008)

> RM is good enough for me.





> Because it's fun, and all I'm after is fun, not hard work and complexity


What is this RM you speak of? If it's uncomplex, quick, and fun... I want it now. :D


----------



## Music Dragon (Jun 29, 2008)

I suppose it IS somewhat complex at first, but it's nothing compared to learning how to actually code. Still - it's not entirely uncomplex.

Nevertheless, it's called RPG Maker. Most popular versions are RPG Maker 2000 and RPG Maker XP, though there's also a 2003 and a fairly recent VX.


----------



## Furretsu (Jun 29, 2008)

Faltzer said:


> Why is this?


It can't possibly be that he just _prefers_ it.


----------



## Lorem Ipsum (Jun 29, 2008)

Heh, I make games, and I use RPG Maker XP. It's good, and its versatility can be increased if you know how to code Ruby, and its child language, RGSS. Game Maker is a bit too complicated, if you ask me. You have to upload single tiles, and make objects and other stuff. If you do want a tileset, you have to code it in using GML, which I can't really be bothered to learn just for this purpose.


----------



## The Quicker Picker-Upper (Jun 29, 2008)

> I suppose it IS somewhat complex at first, but it's nothing compared to learning how to actually code. Still - it's not entirely uncomplex.
> 
> Nevertheless, it's called RPG Maker. Most popular versions are RPG Maker 2000 and RPG Maker XP, though there's also a 2003 and a fairly recent VX.


I've ONLY used the most complex programs, and I often give up after a couple of days of frusteration. XD

Thanks for the answer, sorry for the dumb question.


----------



## Faltzer (Jun 30, 2008)

> Heh, I make games, and I use RPG Maker XP. It's good, and its versatility can be increased if you know how to code Ruby, and its child language, RGSS


... You realize that Game Maker's versatility can be increased with ANY language ever, right? I can open up Turbo Pascel, and I can increase versatility.



Lorem Ipsum said:


> If you do want a tileset, you have to code it in using GML, which I can't really be bothered to learn just for this purpose.


That is what the 'Use as tileset' checkbox is for in the Background Editor, as well as the 'Tiles' tab in the Room Editor...














l2gamedevelopment


----------

